1947-00-R Industrial, Wood & Allied Workers of Canada (I.W.A. Canada), Applicant v. The Balmer Studios Inc./Two Plus Seven Inc., Responding Party.
BEFORE: Stephen Raymond, Vice-Chair, and Board Members J. A. Ronson and D. A. Patterson.
DECISION OF STEPHEN RAYMOND, VICE-CHAIR, AND BOARD MEMBER D. A. PATTERSON; October 5, 2000
1This is an application for certification.
2The Board finds that the applicant is a trade union within the meaning of section 1(1) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (the “Act”).
3It appears to the Board on an examination of only the information provided in the application and the information and membership evidence filed by the applicant (see section 8(3) of the Act), that not less than forty per cent of the individuals in the bargaining unit proposed in the application for certification were members of the union at the time the application was made.
4The responding party proposes two bargaining units and it contends that the applicant’s bargaining unit could not be appropriate. It gives notice under section 8.1 of the Act. However, since the responding party agrees with the trade union’s estimate of the number of persons in the applicant’s proposed bargaining unit, there is no proper section 8.1 notice given and this issue is resolved.
5The applicant has established sufficient membership support in its proposed bargaining unit for the purposes of obtaining a representation vote.
6The Board directs that a representation vote be taken of the individuals in the following voting constituency:
all employees of The Balmer Studios Inc./Two Plus Seven Inc. in the Greater Toronto Area, save and except supervisors, persons above the rank of supervisor, security guards, office personnel, clerical staff and sales staff.
7There is a substantial dispute between the parties as to the appropriate bargaining unit. The applicant has applied for a unit with an employer’s name that includes two legal entities. The responding party has indicated that this is the correct name of the responding party but that there should be two bargaining units, one for each legal entity.
8Accordingly, the ballots cast by the employees of Two Plus Seven Inc. will be collected and counted separately. The issue as to the appropriate bargaining unit will be determined by the Board at the hearing following the vote if necessary. The Board notes that section 1(4) of the Act has not been raised by either party.
9The vote will be held on October 10, 2000. Other vote arrangements will be as determined by the Registrar and set out on the attached "Notice of Vote and of Hearing".
10All individuals who had an employment relationship with the responding party in the voting constituency on October 2, 2000, the certification application filing date, are eligible to vote. Employees having an employment relationship on October 2, 2000, the certification application filing date, include employees who were not at work on that date, so long as there is a reasonable expectation of their return to employment.
11Voters will be asked to indicate whether or not they wish to be represented by the applicant in their employment relations with the responding party.
12The responding party is directed to post copies of this decision and of the "Notice of Vote and of Hearing" adjacent to each of the posted copies of the "Notice to Employees of Application for Certification". These copies must remain posted for 30 days.
13Any party or person who wishes to make representations to the Board about any issue remaining in dispute which relates to the application for certification, other than status disputes, including any matters relating to the representation vote, must file a detailed statement of representations with the Board and deliver it to the other parties, so that it is received by the Board within five days (excluding Saturdays, Sundays and holidays on which the Board is closed) of the date on which the vote is taken. Representations with respect to any status dispute must be made in accordance with the directions provided in Information Bulletin No. 4: Status Disputes in Certification Applications (Non-Construction).
14The matter is referred to the Registrar.
“Stephen Raymond”
for the majority
DECISION OF BOARD MEMBER J. A. RONSON ; October 2, 2000
It would appear that if the Employer agrees to count the ballots, having pleaded that s.8.1 applies, then there may be no bar if the Union loses the vote. In the circumstances then, no vote should take place until the s.8.1 issues are dealt with at a hearing. If a vote is ordered, then at the least the ballot box should be sealed until the s.8.1 issues are resolved.
“J. A. Ronson ”